Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:38, 6 October 2024 editBangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users14,107 edits →Not All: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit App talk topic ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:32, 6 October 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,299,652 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War/Archive 2) (botNext edit →
Line 67:		Line 67:
	\|indexhere=yes		\|indexhere=yes
	}}		}}

	== Destructive Edits of A.Musketeer ==

	: The following is documentation of disruptive edits by A.Musketeer which I originally replied him in a comment in talk section. You can find the original Conversation in the section "Regarding the Disputes". Here 'you' is referring A.Musketeer.

	::::You've made 22 most of them are destructive.
	::::* On your first your edit description was '''"original research and misinterpretation of sources removed"''' You've '''removed''' <small><sup>(none '''<u>original</u>''' or '''primary''': ], ], ], ],Siddiqi1998p209)</sup></small> which seems to imply Bengali women were raped '''irrespective''' of religion. No new source added.
	::::* On your 2nd <small><sup>edit description:"'''misinterpretation of sources removed"'''</sup> ''':'''</small>You've added the '''Disputed''' statement '''"Most of the rape victims of the Pakistani Army and its allies were Hindu women."''' with '''no source''' to back it up.
	::::* On your 3rd <small><sup>edit description:"'''NPOV balancing,''' the major features of the rape should be prioritized than minor ones'''" :'''</sup> You've replaced</small> '''"Bengali Muslim women who were perceived to be under the Hindu influence were impregnated by force in order to create "pure" Muslims."''' with "<ins>The</ins> <ins>Pakistani</ins> <ins>elite</ins> <ins>believed that Hindus</ins> were <ins>behind</ins> <ins>the</ins> <ins>revolt</ins> <ins>and that as soon as there was a solution to</ins> the <ins>"</ins>Hindu <ins>problem"</ins> <ins>the</ins> <ins>conflict</ins> <ins>would</ins> <ins>resolve.</ins>" And you edit description was '''NPOV''' '''balancing.''' You've deleted an neutral sentence and added '''your POV''', this is Civil POV ].
	::::* On your 5th you've reverted a '''revert''' by ](description:No Consensus-15/12/21) which restored the revision before your first edit / reverted your edits. Your revert comment was "'''do not misinterpret sources and make original research'''" It is was you who were doing original research - "Most of the rape victims of the Pakistani Army and its allies were Hindu women." '''still''' no source to back it up. So no misinterpretion ig.
	::::* On your 6th edit: You added source to the claim "'''<big>"Most of the rape victims of the Pakistani Army and its allies were Hindu women.</big>"''' but the source says "'''<big>Hindus were targeted the most"</big>''' It is <big>'''very obvious''' <u>misinterpretion</u></big> of source. <big>Targeted the most means they were specially targeted, it <u>doesn't mean Most of the victim were Hindu Women</u></big>. ] already ] about in the talk page in 18/12/23, but <u>you've '''not''' defended it yet</u>, while you reverted my edit in this article and told not to change anything before Consensus!!. <small>In the meantime, i've worked tirelessly 3 days gathering multiple sources for each statement I've added. I've also extensively commented on each edit. I even added <u>reference about my citation</u>, which is totally overkill.You were given plenty of time to explain to discuss which you didb't do, so reverting your edit was vaild but i didn't revert your original edits instead worked on them.</small> You've reverted my edit saying "''] doesn't have any credentials as an academician."'' But what about the academia.edu journal and newyork times reference, which backs up the same statement? ''Also you stated "you are adding ], Dr Jahangeer Haider is a ]-personnel"'' so even his journal entry in ] is primary source? What you're doing is ].
	::::* ...
	:::: ==== <big>"Most of the rape victims of the Pakistani Army and its allies were Hindu women."</big> ====
	::::It is your claim in the 2nd edit. You've deleted 5 sources some of them directly contradicts with the claim. Among the removed "'''Eighty percent of the raped women were Moslems, reflecting the population of Bangladesh, but Hindu and Christian women were not exempt. …'''" in ], In ] which quoted Susan Brownmiler and quoted, "....“Women’s 1971,” will be published. This gathers the testimonies of women who were not just victims, .... <u>'''Of the 19 women whose stories appear in this collection, 15 are Muslims, 2 are Hindus and 2 are Buddhists'''</u>." and in ] "'''Targeting a specific group? Firstly, Bengalis as a national group and secondly, quite a number of victims being the members of a particular ethnical / religious group- that is the head counts being Hindus primarily substantiate my point."'''
	::::You've deleted these at your 1st edit also failed to mention why you were removing these sources. And in your 2nd edit you added the claim without source and without any edit description of this claim. Also, you've <u>grossly misinterpreted</u> the source you've given.
	::::The source statement was,
	::::<blockquote><big>Hindus were targeted the most</big></blockquote>
	::::Your claim back by source is,
	::::<blockquote><big>Most of the rape victims of the Pakistani Army and its allies were Hindu women.</big></blockquote>
	::::I've already proven my point in the upper section. Also, ] gave some points about the source in a ].
	::::You were using ''']'s''' to refute my argument, his statement is,
	::::<blockquote><big>Women of all ages and social backgrounds, urban and rural, were affected, but it is unclear in which proportions.</big></blockquote>
	::::In ] by Susan Brownmiller which ,
	::::<blockquote><big>“… 200,000, 300,000 or possibly 400,000 women (three sets of statistics have been variously quoted) were raped. Eighty percent of the raped women were Moslems, reflecting the population of Bangladesh, but Hindu and Christian women were not exempt. … Hit-and-run rape of large numbers of Bengali women was brutally simple in terms of logistics as the Pakistani regulars swept through and occupied the tiny, populous land …”</big> p.80</blockquote>
	::::In The Daily Star
	::::<blockquote><big>Article 2(b) of the UN CPPCG declares that the intent to destroy must be directed against one of the four groups; national, racial, ethnical or religious. ... Firstly, Bengalis as a national group and secondly, quite a number of victims being the members of a particular ethnical / religious group- that is the head counts being Hindus primarily substantiate my point. ... The 'Bengalis' constitute a national group whose nationalism is rooted in the history and cultural heritage of Bengal which developed well mainly in the first half of the twentieth century. Though, in 1947 India fragmented into two parts on the basis of religion, common Muslim population of East Pakistan mainly believed in belonging as 'Bengali' not as 'Muslims'.</big></blockquote>
	::::'''Firstly, you're grossly misinterpreting from the source.''' You've removed source material to add your pov, You're reverting sourced material which refutes your claim with talking nonsense.
	::::Also the only you were backing your '''misinterpreted''' claim on, and discrediting all others sources (books, journals, newspapers) has <sup>(1)</sup> in ], ] is <sup><small>(About 7,370,000 results)</small></sup>, ] of '''] is .'''<sup><small>(About 2,060,000 results)</small></sup>
	:::: === Others ===
	::::You're '''<u>misinterpreting a source and not ]</u> it('''@] comments''')''' instead '''reverting''' statement which has '''multiple''' reference.
	::::You were referring ''']''' in your previous reply. His statement '''directly''' '''contradicts''' with your claim: '''"Most of the rape victims of the Pakistani Army and its allies were Hindu women."'''
	::::'''Women of all ages and social backgrounds, urban and rural, were affected, but it is unclear in which proportions.''' <small>], Chapter 4: From rivalries between elites to a crisis of society: Mass violence and famine in Bangladesh (East Pakistan), 1971–77, '''' (2010)</small>
	::::<big>2.Your '''Claim''' : @''] doesn't have any credentials as an academician.''</big>
	::::* In ] the ], S Brownmiller - 1993 - Ballantine Books scholars. ] has 1,591 .
	::::* Your '''misinterpreted''' is <small>(Modern Genocide : The Definitive Resource and Document Collection )</small> <small>as opposed to of Brownmiler and in the ] no but searching for the authors did give results and Susan Brownmiler's gave . I'm just walking on your logic '''not''' commenting anything about the sources.</small>
	] (]) 22:40, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

	== Meat-puppetry notice ==		== Meat-puppetry notice ==

Revision as of 19:32, 6 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 2, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
July 22, 2012	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
January 2, 2013	Peer review	Reviewed
September 25, 2013	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
November 6, 2013	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
August 28, 2020	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / South Asia / Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bangladesh Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Bangladesh To-do list:

Add more images to Bangladesh Liberation War and related pages
Clean up Climate change in Bangladesh, it needs a lot of work
Clean up History of Bangladesh after independence, it needs NPOV
Improve Bangladesh back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengali language back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengalis and related pages
Take a look at the requested articles.
Make a MRT line 3 article.
Extend, add an infobox and a map of New Eskaton to New Eskaton.

Pakistan Mid‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani history.

India: History Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Stfg, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 24 February 2012.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Meat-puppetry notice

User:Wiki.arfazhxss has been recruiting editors on Reddit to edit this and other related articles as well as influence discussions and consensus building on the talk pages. Reddit link: . In case, the page is deleted, here is an arhcive: . LucrativeOffer (talk) 07:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

EDIT: Restored this notice again after it was removed by a vandal IP. There has been a series of Reddit threads posted by u/nerdiste (A.K.A User:Wiki.arfazhxss) to swing the consensus in favor of changing "Bengali Hindu" to "Bengali" in the lead. Links: , , . LucrativeOffer (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Repetition of Paragraph

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The first paragraph of the International Reactions header is repeated twice. Zargham Ali (talk) 14:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Done--❯❯❯Pravega 16:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Not All

Not all Imams and Mullahs said that in support of Pakistan, Many Imams and other religious scholars supported the Bangladesh Liberation Cause or condemned the assault. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:38, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: